Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Miller v. Northwestern National Insurance Co., 354 N.W.2d 58.

28 citing documents.

Thomas Shimota, Appellant, B&T Automotive, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Co., -62 (Minn. App. 1984).
In the Matter of Shah & Company, Ltd, Firm Permit No. 01282, Ramanik Shah, CPA Certificate No. 09193, … Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Dustin Ward, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Donald Sealock, derivatively on behalf of St. Michael Mall, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
All Finish Concrete, Inc. v. Erickson 899 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
All Finish Concrete, Inc. v. Erickson 899 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Reichel Investments, L.P. v. Craig A. Reichel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Reichel Investments, L.P. v. Craig A. Reichel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Co., (stating that a person who has full control over a corporation is presumed to be in privity with the corporation).
Marjorie Gowan v. The Estate of Robert E. Pape Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Marjorie Gowan v. The Estate of Robert E. Pape Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Rucker v. Schmidt 768 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Rucker v. Schmidt 768 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Co., (citing Margo-Kraft Distribs., Inc. v. Minneapolis Gas Co., 294 Minn. 274 , ).
State Ex Rel. Friends of the Riverfront v. City of Minneapolis 751 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State Ex Rel. Friends of the Riverfront v. City of Minneapolis 751 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Co., (remanding for privity determination when evidence of conflict was present).
Crossman v. Lockwood 713 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Crossman v. Lockwood 713 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
SMA Services, Inc. v. Weaver 632 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
SMA Services, Inc. v. Weaver 632 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Co., (citations omitted).
Houlihan v. Fimon 454 N.W.2d 633 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Houlihan v. Fimon 454 N.W.2d 633 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
“Privity is usually a question of fact requiring case-by-ease determination.”
Harbal v. Federal Land Bank of St. Paul 449 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Harbal v. Federal Land Bank of St. Paul 449 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Denzer v. Frisch 430 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Denzer v. Frisch 430 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
“Privity is usually a question of fact requiring case-by-case determination.”
Brunsoman v. Seltz 414 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Brunsoman v. Seltz 414 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(citing Ellis v. Minneapolis Comm’n *550 on Civil Rights, ).
BOGENHOLM BY BOGENHOLM v. House 388 N.W.2d 402 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
BOGENHOLM BY BOGENHOLM v. House 388 N.W.2d 402 Minn. Ct. App. 1986

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by